The Rev. Ethan Smith of Poultney (Vt.) already known as the author of A Dissertation on the Prophecies, Sermons on Baptism, and other productions, has published a new and highly interesting work on THE STATE OF THE HEBREWS. It is with a view to calling publick attention to this valuable little book, as much as to express an individual opinion, that a few strictures are about to be hazarded on one of its principal positions. The subject is one, which derives peculiar interest from exertions now making in favour of the Jews. There are many points in it much needing discussion; and certainly, if we may judge from our own feelings, such a collection of facts and details, as is presented by our author, must secure for his book an unusual degree of popularity.

After a slight view of the history of their dispersion, the principal positions advanced respecting the Jews, are, that they will certainly be restored; that our own country is the land addressed by the prophet Isaiah, as destined to become a leading part in the restoration; and that the remnant of the ten tribes of Israel are identified with our North American Savages.

The first two of, these positions have our most cordial assent; on the latter, a theory first adopted, we believe, by Mr. Adair, and afterwards more at large, by the venerated Boudinot, we shall make some animadversions.

The principal arguments relied on by our author may be reduced to the following, viz: the religious belief of the North American Indians—their language, and their traditions and customs. These, it is supposed, are such as clearly to identify them with the remnant of the lost tribes of Israel. To these, we shall first attempt an answer.

1. The Indians, it is said, believe in one God. This, to a certain degree, is plausibly made out; but there is nothing in this, as far as appears, which is peculiar to the American heathen. All heathen nations have some notion of a Supreme God—more or less confused by their "foolish imaginations," in proportion usually, to their degree of philosophical refinement aside from the light of revelation.

. . .

2. Of the language of the American tribes, which Mr. Smith and some others have considered as radically Hebrew, several remarks must be made.

The first is, that, as the Indians have no written language, it is impossible, almost, to fix their words. In an utterance so deeply guttural, and to us, at least, entirely indistinct, how easy is it for a lively imagination, set on finding resemblances to known words, to be deceived?

It is impossible, moreover, in sounds uttered by beings of similar organs, that there should not be some real resemblances in languages used by the most distantly related nations.

. . .

The amount thus far, then, is that some half a dozen words have a resemblance—perhaps doubtful; and these picked up, as our author admit, not from any one, but from many dialects. It is worthy of remark, further, that of the words which are admitted to bear a resemblance to the Hebrew, the principal are those relating to generic or prominent objects. Man, Eve, Heavens, and proper names, if they here exist, might have been borrowed from eastern languages, on quite a different theory.

. . .

Mr. Smith seems all along to be taking for granted, (what we presume he does not believe,) that if our American Indians did not descend from Israel, they have always been in this country, cut off from communication with all other people. It is universally admitted, however, that they once had a residence among some eastern nation. If so, they have had the same opportunities with other Heathens of deriving religious names and customs from the ancient Hebrews.

We have bestowed the more attention on this argument, from having considered it to be the principal one on which this question must turn; and, as the result, we must think, that with respect to many of the words added, there is, from the nature of the case, much uncertainty; and further, that if it be true that the Divine names are found among our Indians, it makes no more for their Hebrew origin than that of many other nations.

. . .

Thus I have attempted to answer the principal arguments in favour of Mr. Smith's theory. In a future number I shall assume the far easier task of proposing objections.

N.